Trócaire have just posted a statement on their website, under the headline “BCI upholds its decision on Trócaire advert”, in which they say that they have agreed to revise their controversial radio and television advertisments:

Trócaire has been informed today by the BCI that it is confirming it’s initial decision in relation to Trócaire’s Lenten advertisement on gender equality, deeming that the campaign is toward a political end.

The BCI has proposed an amendment to the script of the broadcast as follows:
“Support Trócaire to help end gender inequality.”

The original script stated:
“Support Trócaire’s Lenten Campaign to help end gender inequality.”

Despite this change Trócaire is satisfied that the three elements of our Lenten campaign namely, fundraising, awareness raising and campaigning on UN Resolution 1325 [link] (including the online petition [link]) are still fully intact. All these activities continue as before.

In order to ensure a successful Lenten campaign Trócaire felt it had no option but to agree to this revised script.

Advertising is a central element in ensuring a successful Lenten campaign and the work of the organisation is hugely dependent on the success of the campaign.

It should be noted that RTÉ continues to carry Trócaire’s Lenten advertisements as originally submitted.

We believe the controversy generated by the BCI’s decision over the past week raises serious questions about this legislation and how it is interpreted.

We believe it is time for a full debate on the background and intentions of this legislation.

There is a danger that Trócaire and other organisations that advocate and campaign on issues of social justice will find their ability to do this work further constrained by the legislation in the future.

Trócaire believes a review of this legislation is urgently required.

The BCI ban of Trócaire’s original television and radio advertisments, discussed here earlier in the week, has provoked a predicatable storm of controversy. Mary Raftery argued strongly in yesterday’s Irish Times that the advertisment should have been broadcast (in its original form). Other Irish NGOs expressed their surprise at the BCI decision; Conor Lenihan, Minister of State for Overseas Development Assistance also described it as ‘surprising‘; and Michael D Higgins (Labour party TD) described the ban as incomprehensible (here, here, and here) and has promised a Private Members Bill to clarify the law in regard to the right of campaign groups to use radio and television advertising to promote their campaigns.

Ciarán on Draw Breath has an excellent analysis of the background to the legislative prohibitions on political advertising; whilst Eddie McGarr puts the definition of ‘political’ into broader legislative context. Red Mum describes the BCI’s decision as ‘dreadful‘; and ask direct describes it as ‘utterly ridiculous’ and ‘outrageous’; whilst Bock the Robber, and Hugh Green on Most Sincerely Folks, and Duncan’s TV adland (again) each demonstrate the absurdity of the BCI’s reasoning on ‘political’.

It is unfortunate, to say the least, that it should have come to this. The BCI, who have banned the ad, and RTÉ Authority, who have declined to do so, are due to be merged (by the Broadcasting Bill, 2006) into a single regulator, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. Perhaps an amendment to this Bill, along the lines suggested by Michael D Higgins, would prevent the BAI replicating the BCI’s unfortunate attitude here.

Update (30 March 2007): Sarah Carey on GUBU had a typically perspicacious post on the issue on 19 March: Charity bitten by watchdog – sorry I missed it at the time, Sarah. A sample:

What we have here is a bad law, interpreted and implemented in a random manner. … That the BCI defines the term “political” very broadly would be bad enough, but it compounds the problem with inconsistency. …

The BCI and RTE can’t do much about the law, but they strike me as being a tad zealous in their application of it. … The BCI might take a heavy hand when implementing the law, but only if someone invites them to. It’s on this haphazard basis that the airwaves are being censored.

Shameless plug: If you’re interested in the legal background to the ban on political and religious advertising, have a look at my earlier post on the issue.

17 Responses to “Trócaire revise ads in face of BCI ban”

Some of you readers may already know this little story, but when Paula was home on maternity leave, the community mother for our area informed Paula of an advert been filmed in Ardmore studios (which are across the road from……

Social inequalities are ALWAYS tied up with political issues and lack of political will. To ban this ad sets a precedent that could potentially ban all future charity ads that try to change public opinions. Additionally, the ban seems to rest on a technicality and totally ignore the intent behind the campaign. I cannot believe that the BCI is in favour of discrimination against females, yet banning an ad of a charitable organisation with limited advertising funds makes you wonder…

The ban on political advertising closely parallels restrictions on campaign finance in having a noble objective but undesirable outcomes. Preventing political advertising does little to “level the playing field” – incumbents are still guaranteed airtime but outsiders will find it harder to be heard. Similarly, campaign finance laws weigh disproportionately on outsiders – especially in systems where established political parties enjoy access to state funding and the perks of office. Regulatory capture anyone?

Thanks, TJ, for this. You are absolutely right about the consequences for outsiders of campaign finance restrictions. I understand that the reason for banning political advertising was in part to help keep election costs down, and the free party election broadcast system was put in place as a quid pro quo. I don’t think that political advertising by non-parties was intended to be excluded by s20(4) of the 1960 Act or s10(3) of the 1988 Act, as the non-parties did not have the compensation of access to election broadcasts (see eg here and here). Moreover, this suggests that the word ‘political’ in those sections should be given the narrowest possible meaning. Although the section, in principle, is constitutional, that does not preclude a duty to interpret it according to the ‘double construction’ rule to impair rights such as freedom of expression as little as possible; and this in turn would add force to the argument that ‘political’ should be interpreted as narrowly as possible. Unfortunately, the High Court has given it a broad understanding,

If there is a positive to be gleaned from all of this, it’s that the TrÃ³caire campaign received much more publicity as a result of the BCI’s action than it would have had it simply let the ad run as it was in the first place.

Have to agree with TJ regarding the campaign finance and the political advertising ban. Both seem to me to be having very undesirable stifling effects insofar as they are applied to non-established political players. This area badly needs legislative rethinking.

I suppose they were toasting Michael D in Youth Defence HQ last week – given the specific proposal he came out with for ‘fixing’ the problem. On the other hand, if one were to include “furthering any particular outcome at a referendum” in his new definition of what is “directed towards any . . . political end” one would be a large part of the way back to the status quo.

[…] it was wrong to ban TrÃ³caire’s tv advertisement on one side of this debate last year, and it was, it is equally wrong now to penalize Kevin Myers for putting the other side of the argument. Much […]

[…] Regular readers of this blog will know that section 20(4) of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960 (also here) and section 10(3) of the Radio and Television Act, 1988 (also here) as amended by section 65 of the Broadcasting Act, 2001 (also here) prohibit broadcast advertising in Ireland directed to any religious or political end (see here | here | here | here | here | here). […]

My recent tweets

Blogroll (or, really, a non-blogroll)

What I'd like for here is a simple widget that takes the list of feeds from my existing RSS reader and displays it here as a blogroll. Nothing fancy. I'd love a recommendation, if you have one.

I had built a blogroll here on my Google Reader RSS subscriptions. Google Reader produced a line of html for each RSS subscription category, each of which I pasted here. So I had a list of my subscriptions as my blogroll, organised by category, which updated whenever I edited Google Reader. Easy peasy. However, with the sad and unnecessary demise of that product, so also went this blogroll. Please take a moment to mourn Google Reader. If there's an RSS reader which provides a line of html for the list of subscriptions, or for each RSS subscription category as Google Reader did, I'd happily use that. So, as I've already begged, I'd love a recommendation, if you have one.

Meanwhile, please bear with me until I find a new RSS+Blogroll solution